Human civilization is fairly short-lived and having undergone several wars, humans have only just begun to understand that democracy is a more acceptable social system.
Taiwanese voted for a reliable and trustworthy government so that they do not have to worry about food safety, security or the quality of healthcare, and least of all eggs.
Even if there were no eggs on the shelves for a few days, people would not panic, because they know they are living in a free society, and that eggs would be back on the shelves as soon as the government responds to the shortage. After all, eggs are not everyday essentials and any food that contains amino acids can be an alternative.
However, Taiwan has been plagued by egg-related controversies since the beginning of this year.
It all started with a legislator questioning the government’s egg import program, then snowballed into a nationwide furor of people having qualms about eggs, with some even calling for Minister of Agriculture Chen Chi-chung (陳吉仲) to resign from his post. In response to the controversy, the government has offered many explanations to reassure people.
Nevertheless, anyone who searches for “eggs” on the Internet would see a series of misleading news reports. For two months certain media outlets have been issuing reports lambasting the Ministry of Agriculture for several things, such as how the government was “overfunding” egg import companies and the dangers of expired imported eggs, while giving a slap on the wrist to hoarders who caused shortage in the first place.
This kind of overwhelming and biased reporting aims to destroy consumers’ trust in the government’s agricultural policies. The same playbook can be seen in last year’s local elections, when there were waves of attacks on plagiarism and academic credentials or the government’s strategy to curb the COVID-19 pandemic.
The high volume of one-sided news reporting aims to brainwash the public by sowing mistrust, and creating social division through coercive persuasion and cognitive manipulation. I believe Taiwanese, with their educated background and sophisticated grasp of common knowledge, have the media literacy to tell the true from the false, and not fall for these ideological fallacies.
Chen Chiao-chicy is a psychiatrist at Mackay Memorial Hospital in Taipei and an adjunct professor.
Translated by Rita Wang
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
US President Donald Trump created some consternation in Taiwan last week when he told a news conference that a successful trade deal with China would help with “unification.” Although the People’s Republic of China has never ruled Taiwan, Trump’s language struck a raw nerve in Taiwan given his open siding with Russian President Vladimir Putin’s aggression seeking to “reunify” Ukraine and Russia. On earlier occasions, Trump has criticized Taiwan for “stealing” the US’ chip industry and for relying too much on the US for defense, ominously presaging a weakening of US support for Taiwan. However, further examination of Trump’s remarks in
It is being said every second day: The ongoing recall campaign in Taiwan — where citizens are trying to collect enough signatures to trigger re-elections for a number of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators — is orchestrated by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), or even President William Lai (賴清德) himself. The KMT makes the claim, and foreign media and analysts repeat it. However, they never show any proof — because there is not any. It is alarming how easily academics, journalists and experts toss around claims that amount to accusing a democratic government of conspiracy — without a shred of evidence. These
China on May 23, 1951, imposed the so-called “17-Point Agreement” to formally annex Tibet. In March, China in its 18th White Paper misleadingly said it laid “firm foundations for the region’s human rights cause.” The agreement is invalid in international law, because it was signed under threat. Ngapo Ngawang Jigme, head of the Tibetan delegation sent to China for peace negotiations, was not authorized to sign the agreement on behalf of the Tibetan government and the delegation was made to sign it under duress. After seven decades, Tibet remains intact and there is global outpouring of sympathy for Tibetans. This realization
RSS